On 3 Apr 2005 09:47:58 -0700, "bluesmama" 
wrote:

>I'm truly interested in what you think, dissenting or not.

To me, this line from the URL both best defines masculism and is part
of the problem:

"A more encompassing view of masculism is that it is a movement to
empower males in society, and to redress discrimination against men."

To redress discrimination against men, yes.

To casually call men "males," a dismissive term that has gained great
currency in the media over the last thirty years, no.

Frankly, my opinion is that there is increasing anger among men, even
if not consciously directed towards anti-male sexism, and that the
fine ideological distinctions made in the article are way behind the
times. No one really seems to care about that any more.

It's rather a confused article, but has some merit in the "Masculist
observations" section. Thanks for posting it.




--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 4/3/05 5:00:44 PM ---